Say what the bundle is and how to serve it, from the definition that packs it [#54] - #166
Closed
iderex wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Say what the bundle is and how to serve it, from the definition that packs it [#54]#166iderex wants to merge 1 commit into
iderex wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
…packs it [#54] There is nothing telling somebody who is not me how to run this site. The release run already packs an archive and attaches a bill of materials beside it, and what an operator has to do with either is written down nowhere, so the only route to it is reading the generator and the workflow files. This is that document. It says what the archive holds, what serves it, what the host has to be told about the not-found page, and how to check what arrived. Every claim in it carries the command that produced it, run against an archive packed from a checkout by the commands the document itself quotes. Three things it states that are not obvious from the output and that cost an operator real time when they are found by surprise. A reference beginning with a slash resolves against the filesystem root when a page is opened as a file, so the site has to be served rather than opened. The canonical address, the sitemap entries and the robots line all name one host and go on naming it wherever the bundle is served. And the hash list travels inside the archive, so it answers whether the download arrived intact and not whether it is what this repository built; what answers the second question is packing the tag again and comparing, which two runs of the packing commands are shown to support. What it does not claim is that any of this was read off a published file. No release exists, the document says so with the command that shows it, and the section holding the residuals also records that the two archives compared were packed on one machine, so the comparison covers variation between runs and not variation between toolchains.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Superseded
This branch is abandoned and the change lands on #167 instead. The reason is
here rather than underneath, because the body is where a refusal belongs.
Two checks refused the head, and both were defects in the change rather than in
the checks.
Enforce greppable invariantsrefused the excerpt this document pasted from thebill of materials, because it carried the version this repository releases under
and that version is read from one file:
The gate had been run before the push and had said
ok. The difference is thatthe file was not in the index yet when it ran, so the rows over tracked text had
nothing to read, and a document about how to verify things is the wrong place to
learn that from a red server. The gate is re-run with the file staged on the
replacement branch.
DCO sign-offrefused the commit for carrying noSigned-off-bytrailer:Both runs 2026-08-16 against
ffe4d6d.The trailer cannot be added to a landed commit without rewriting the branch, so
the correction is pushed under a new name and this one is left where it is. The
replacement carries one commit with the trailer, the excerpt cut above the lines
that name the version, and the document saying that the elision is deliberate.
Nothing here reached the mainline.